William Pitt was a defender
of the colonies. He lead England against the French in the 7
Years War, called the French & Indian War here in the
colonies. He was also brother-in-law to the Prime Minister
of England Grenville.

William Pitt's speech against the Stamp Act
January 14, 1766
===

Gentlemen, Sir,

I have been charged with giving birth to
sedition in America. They have spoken their sentiments with
freedom against this unhappy act, and that freedom has
become their crime.

Sorry I am to hear the liberty of speech
in this House, imputed as a crime. No gentleman ought to be
afraid to exercise it. It is a liberty by which the
gentleman who calumniates it might have profited, by which
he ought to have profited. He ought to have desisted from
this project.

The gentleman tells us, America is
obstinate; America is almost in open rebellion. I rejoice
that America has resisted. Three million of people so dead
to all feelings of liberty, as voluntarily to submit to be
slaves, would have been fit instruments to make slaves of
the rest.

I come not here armed at all points, with
law cases and acts of Parliament, with the statute book
doubled down in dog's-ears, to defend the cause of liberty:
if I had, I myself would have cited the two cases of Chester
and Durham. I would have cited them, to have shown that even
under former arbitrary reigns, Parliaments were ashamed of
taxing a people without their consent, and allowed them
representatives.

Why did the gentleman confine himself to
Chester and Durham? He might have taken a higher example in
Wales; Wales, that never was taxed by Parliament till it was
incorporated.

I would not debate a particular point of
law with the gentleman. I know his abilities. I have been
obliged to his diligent researches: but, for the defense of
liberty, upon a general principle, upon a constitutional
principle, it is a ground on which I stand firm; on which I
dare meet any man.

The gentleman tells us of many who are
taxed, and are not represented. The India Company,
merchants, stock-holders, manufacturers. Surely many of
these are represented in other capacities, as owners of
land, or as freemen of boroughs.

It is a misfortune that more are not
equally represented: but they are all inhabitants, and as
such, are they not virtually represented? . . . They have
connections with those that elect, and they have influence
over them. The gentleman mentioned the stockholders: I hope
he does not reckon the debts of the nation as a part of the
national estate. Since the accession of King William, many
ministers, some of great, others of more moderate abilities,
have taken the lead of government.

(passage omitted)

None of these thought, or ever dreamed, of
robbing the colonies of their constitutional rights. That
was to mark the era of the late administration: not that
there were wanting some, when I had the honour to serve his
Majesty, to propose to me to burn my fingers with an
American Stamp-Act.

With the enemy at their back, with our
bayonets at their breasts, in the day of their distress,
perhaps the Americans would have submitted to the
imposition: but it would have been taking an ungenerous and
unjust advantage.

The gentleman boasts of his bounties to
America. Are not those bounties intended finally for the
benefit of this kingdom? If they are not, he has misapplied
the national treasures.

I am no courtier of America; I stand up
for this kingdom. I maintain, that the parliament has a
right to bind, to restrain America. Our legislative power
over the colonies is sovereign and supreme. When it ceases
to be sovereign and supreme, I would advise every gentleman
to sell his lands, if he can, and embark for that country.

When two countries are connected together,
like England and her colonies, without being incorporated,
the one must necessarily govern; the greater must rule the
less; but so rule it, as not to contradict the fundamental
principles that are common to both.

If the gentleman does not understand the
difference between external and internal taxes, I cannot
help it; but there is a plain distinction between taxes
levied for the purpose of raising a revenue, and duties
imposed for the regulation of trade, for the accommodation
of the subject; although, in the consequences, some revenue
might incidentally arise from the latter.

The gentleman asks, when were the colonies
emancipated? But I desire to know, when were they made
slaves. But I dwell not upon words. When I had the honour of
serving his Majesty, I availed myself of the means of
information which I derived from my office: I speak,
therefore, from knowledge. My materials were good; I was at
pains to collect, to digest, to consider them; and I will be
bold to affirm, that the profits to Great Britain from the
trade of the colonies, through all its branches, is two
millions a year. This is the fund that carried you
triumphantly through the last war....

You owe this to America: this is the price
America pays you for her protection. And shall a miserable
financier come with a boast, that he can bring a pepper-corn
into the exchequer, to the loss of millions to the nation?

I dare not say, how much higher these
profits may be augmented. Omitting the immense increase of
people by natural population, and the emigration from every
part of Europe, I am convinced the whole commercial system
of America may be altered to advantage. You have prohibited
where you ought to have encouraged, encouraged where you
ought to have prohibited. Improper restraints have been laid
on the continent, in favour of the islands. You have but two
nations to trade with in America. Would you had twenty! Let
acts of parliament in consequence of treaties remain, but
let not an English minister become a custom-house officer
for Spain, or for any foreign power. Much is wrong; much may
be amended for the general good of the whole....

The gentleman must not wonder he was not
contradicted, when, as minister, he asserted the right of
Parliament to tax America. I know not how it is, but there
is a modesty in this House, which does not choose to
contradict a minister. I wish gentlemen would get the better
of this modesty. Even that chair, Sir, sometimes looks
towards St. James's. If they do not, perhaps the collective
body may begin to abate of its respect for the
representative...

A great deal has been said without doors
of the power, of the strength of America. It is a topic that
ought to be cautiously meddled with. In a good cause, on a
sound bottom, the force of this country can crush America to
atoms. I know the valour of your troops. I know the skill of
your officers. There is not a company of foot that has
served in America out of which you may not pick a man of
sufficient knowledge and experience to make him governor of
a colony there. But on this ground, on the Stamp Act, when
so many here will think a crying injustice, I am one who
will lift up my hands against it.

In such a cause, your success would be
hazardous. America, if she fell, would fall like a strong
man. She would embrace the pillars of the state, and pull
down the constitution along with her. Is this your boasted
peace? Not to sheathe the sword in it scabbard, but to
sheathe it in the bowels of your countrymen? Will you
quarrel with yourselves, now the whole House of Bourbon is
united against you...

The Americans have not acted in all things
with prudence and temper. They have been wronged. They have
been driven to madness by injustice. Will you punish them
for the madness you have occasioned? Rather let prudence and
temper come first from this side. I will undertake for
America, that she will follow the example. There are two
lines in a ballad of Prior's, of a man's behaviour to his
wife, so applicable to you and your colonies, that I cannot
help repeating them:

"Be to her faults a little blind

Be to her virtues very kind."

Upon the whole, I will beg leave to tell
the House what is really my opinion. It is, that the Stamp
Act be repealed absolutely, totally, and immediately; that
the reason for the repeal should be assigned, because it was
founded on an erroneous principle. At the same time, let the
sovereign authority of this country over the colonies be
asserted in as strong terms as can be devised, and be made
to extend every point of legislation whatsoever: that we may
bind their trade, confine their manufactures, and exercise
every power whatsoever - except that of taking money out of
their pockets without their consent.

===

This was William Pitt's last speech. He
had to be carried into Parliament to give the speech. And he
collapsed at the end of it. Pitt died a short time later.
The Stamp Act was repealed later.